Cargando…

Role of minimally invasive surgery versus open approach in patients with early-stage uterine carcinosarcomas: a retrospective multicentric study

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this retrospective study was to compare surgical and survival outcome in only patients with early-stage UCSs managed by laparotomic surgery (LPT) versus minimally invasive surgery (MIS). METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected in four Italian different institutions. Inclus...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Corrado, Giacomo, Ciccarone, Francesca, Cosentino, Francesco, Legge, Francesco, Rosati, Andrea, Arcieri, Martina, Turco, Luigi Carlo, Certelli, Camilla, Federico, Alex, Vizza, Enrico, Fanfani, Francesco, Scambia, Giovanni, Ferrandina, Gabriella
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7873090/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32880752
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00432-020-03372-x
_version_ 1783649321441296384
author Corrado, Giacomo
Ciccarone, Francesca
Cosentino, Francesco
Legge, Francesco
Rosati, Andrea
Arcieri, Martina
Turco, Luigi Carlo
Certelli, Camilla
Federico, Alex
Vizza, Enrico
Fanfani, Francesco
Scambia, Giovanni
Ferrandina, Gabriella
author_facet Corrado, Giacomo
Ciccarone, Francesca
Cosentino, Francesco
Legge, Francesco
Rosati, Andrea
Arcieri, Martina
Turco, Luigi Carlo
Certelli, Camilla
Federico, Alex
Vizza, Enrico
Fanfani, Francesco
Scambia, Giovanni
Ferrandina, Gabriella
author_sort Corrado, Giacomo
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The aim of this retrospective study was to compare surgical and survival outcome in only patients with early-stage UCSs managed by laparotomic surgery (LPT) versus minimally invasive surgery (MIS). METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected in four Italian different institutions. Inclusion criteria were UCS diagnosis confirmed by the definitive histological examination, and stage I or II according to the FIGO staging system. RESULTS: Between August 2000 and March 2019, the data relative to 170 patients bearing UCSs were collected: of these, 95 were defined as early-stage disease (stage I–II) based on the histological report at the primary surgery, and thus were included in this study. Forty-four patients were managed by LPT, and 51 patients were managed by MIS. The operative time was lower in the MIS group versus the LPT group (p value 0.021); the median estimated blood loss was less in the MIS group compared to the median of LPT group (p value < 0.0001). The length of hospital stay days was shorter in the MIS patients (p value < 0.0001). Overall, there were eight (8.4%) post-operative complications; of these, seven were recorded in the LPT group versus one in the MIS group (p value 0.023). There was no difference in the disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) between the two groups. CONCLUSION: There was no difference of oncologic outcome between the two approaches, in face of a more favourable peri-operative and post-operative profile in the MIS group.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7873090
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78730902021-02-22 Role of minimally invasive surgery versus open approach in patients with early-stage uterine carcinosarcomas: a retrospective multicentric study Corrado, Giacomo Ciccarone, Francesca Cosentino, Francesco Legge, Francesco Rosati, Andrea Arcieri, Martina Turco, Luigi Carlo Certelli, Camilla Federico, Alex Vizza, Enrico Fanfani, Francesco Scambia, Giovanni Ferrandina, Gabriella J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Original Article – Clinical Oncology OBJECTIVE: The aim of this retrospective study was to compare surgical and survival outcome in only patients with early-stage UCSs managed by laparotomic surgery (LPT) versus minimally invasive surgery (MIS). METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected in four Italian different institutions. Inclusion criteria were UCS diagnosis confirmed by the definitive histological examination, and stage I or II according to the FIGO staging system. RESULTS: Between August 2000 and March 2019, the data relative to 170 patients bearing UCSs were collected: of these, 95 were defined as early-stage disease (stage I–II) based on the histological report at the primary surgery, and thus were included in this study. Forty-four patients were managed by LPT, and 51 patients were managed by MIS. The operative time was lower in the MIS group versus the LPT group (p value 0.021); the median estimated blood loss was less in the MIS group compared to the median of LPT group (p value < 0.0001). The length of hospital stay days was shorter in the MIS patients (p value < 0.0001). Overall, there were eight (8.4%) post-operative complications; of these, seven were recorded in the LPT group versus one in the MIS group (p value 0.023). There was no difference in the disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) between the two groups. CONCLUSION: There was no difference of oncologic outcome between the two approaches, in face of a more favourable peri-operative and post-operative profile in the MIS group. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-09-03 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC7873090/ /pubmed/32880752 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00432-020-03372-x Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Original Article – Clinical Oncology
Corrado, Giacomo
Ciccarone, Francesca
Cosentino, Francesco
Legge, Francesco
Rosati, Andrea
Arcieri, Martina
Turco, Luigi Carlo
Certelli, Camilla
Federico, Alex
Vizza, Enrico
Fanfani, Francesco
Scambia, Giovanni
Ferrandina, Gabriella
Role of minimally invasive surgery versus open approach in patients with early-stage uterine carcinosarcomas: a retrospective multicentric study
title Role of minimally invasive surgery versus open approach in patients with early-stage uterine carcinosarcomas: a retrospective multicentric study
title_full Role of minimally invasive surgery versus open approach in patients with early-stage uterine carcinosarcomas: a retrospective multicentric study
title_fullStr Role of minimally invasive surgery versus open approach in patients with early-stage uterine carcinosarcomas: a retrospective multicentric study
title_full_unstemmed Role of minimally invasive surgery versus open approach in patients with early-stage uterine carcinosarcomas: a retrospective multicentric study
title_short Role of minimally invasive surgery versus open approach in patients with early-stage uterine carcinosarcomas: a retrospective multicentric study
title_sort role of minimally invasive surgery versus open approach in patients with early-stage uterine carcinosarcomas: a retrospective multicentric study
topic Original Article – Clinical Oncology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7873090/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32880752
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00432-020-03372-x
work_keys_str_mv AT corradogiacomo roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy
AT ciccaronefrancesca roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy
AT cosentinofrancesco roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy
AT leggefrancesco roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy
AT rosatiandrea roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy
AT arcierimartina roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy
AT turcoluigicarlo roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy
AT certellicamilla roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy
AT federicoalex roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy
AT vizzaenrico roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy
AT fanfanifrancesco roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy
AT scambiagiovanni roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy
AT ferrandinagabriella roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy